I think I had a realization and am asking for feedback.
Let's say we have a group of people living in poverty and mostly uneducated(statistically speakinf). If we give everyone a certain amount of cash the result would probably that they spent the for necessities because they have probably debt, need food, rent etc. Of course everyone is different, but let's say for the arguments sake that it wouldn't help society(most people, not wealthy/upper middle class). Another problem is this solution isn't scalable with larger amounts of cash because of inflation and other reasons.
However that's not the point (im gonna get to it, keep on reading).
So let's say we give the people free housing. Im talking about an actual apartment/house that they own. However let's be realistic, I didn't look at numbers yet, tho maybe not every person gets one but every family gets one?(this is not about details tho) Another important thing to note here is that it is crucial that the free housing can't be sold. Why? So banks/companies can't abuse people's flaws(for example a gambling addict, of u need an example). Yes he can take a credit with his house as theoretical collateral but it's the banks problem if he doesn't pay back the money since they didn't did their DD right how he is actually gonna pay it back. In no way should they have any right in any way to lay claim on his living space.
Yes I'm describing housing as a constitutional right with extra steps.
Alright… I'm getting to the point. The point is how we look at problems in our globalised world with an impossibly complex economy. Who is gonna suffer from it when we take away housing from some and give it to others? Companies, billionaires, shareholders.
On the contrary, who is gonna suffer if we give the people cash? Yes, the people because all the money is gonna trickle up to rich people and all we get is inflation.
To make it even simpler, we need to look who is gonna suffer from our solutions and how is it going to affect us.
So that was my point, you can stop reading here or don't but I wanna clarify some important issues with my suggestion.
So we take away from companies, billionaites and millionaires. Im aware that behind these companiesare people that actually work and have to make ends meet(not talking about rich people)Tho they don't have to pay rent anymore. Still, they have to provide for their families. My only solution to this is that they have to find new jobs, maybe u can think of a more elegant solution.
About the rich people. I don't wanna take all of it and I don't mind if someone owns 2/3 apartments but when you go from 20 million net worth to 2 million net worth, you are still rich and I have no sympathy. Yes I bet there are a lot of people that worked hard for their succes, even poor people that made it to the top, but let's be real, most people were born into privilege and capitalized on that.
Also think about this, the US has 300million people and let's say the median rent is about 200$/person(probably low, but I rather shoot low then exaggerate, also multiple people live in a home, you also have kids etc). That would be 60billion you save the American people EVERY YEAR. That's 60 billion the people can spend on the economy evey year.
Yes I'm aware I need to look at numbers to even see if this is remotely possible if we neglect the actual problem with this scenario… Taking away from the people in control who abused the system for way too long.
If you came this far I'm happy you took the time, leave some feedback and don't try to focus too much on details. I would also be grateful for resources/papers which actually have some scientific data.